At first glance, I too thought this was one of the best "dog ate my homework" stories (and the ALJ may agree). However, I did a search this morning on the USITC website and it seems that Otteson is no stranger to this ALJ. Otteson was named in at least 13 other ITC 337 cases.

Of particular interest were cases 773 and 787 which were both filed on behalf of Ogma and had to do with sound and image display. Between the two cases there were over 40 respondents including:

Apple, HTC, Seiko, Sanyo, Mitsubishi, Toshiba, Casio, Canon, Epson, Nintendo, Sharp, Sony and on and on the list goes. At one point Canon filed a motion and in order 17 (case 773) it was determined that claim 3 of patent 472 was to be anticipated by the 577 publication therefore that claim was invalidated. The others were not.

Most of those respondents (if not all) settled.

The point is Otteson does know what he is doing and I no longer believe that the late submission is an intentional stall tactic. Of course the ALJ will make that firnal determination.